David A. Belniak v. Florida Highway Patrol, etal , 599 F. App'x 357 ( 2015 )

Case: 14-11490 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-11490
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 8:12-cv-01334-MSS-MAP
DAVID A. BELNIAK,
an individual,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL,
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR
VEHICLES,
TONI M. SHIELDS,
an Individual,
MICHAEL L. STYERS,
an Individual,
CHRISTIAN MOSESMAN,
Defendants - Appellees,
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Defendant.
Case: 14-11490 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 2 of 3
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(March 27, 2015)
Before MARTIN, ANDERSON, and COX, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The Plaintiff, David A. Belniak, pleaded guilty to three counts of DUI
manslaughter and one count of felony DUI serious bodily injury. He then filed this
action, alleging state law claims for negligence and gross negligence, a civil
conspiracy claim, and claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. All of the Plaintiff’s claims
are premised on allegedly unconstitutional conduct by the police in investigating
the car accident that led to the Plaintiff’s guilty plea.
The Defendants moved to dismiss all claims under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6), which the district court granted. The district court held that
the Plaintiff was collaterally estopped from bringing these claims due to his guilty
plea. The district court also found that, under Florida law, the negligence claims
could not be brought as long as the Plaintiff’s convictions were outstanding.
We review a dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) de novo. We can affirm on any
basis supported by the record, regardless of whether the district court decided the
2
Case: 14-11490 Date Filed: 03/27/2015 Page: 3 of 3
case on that basis. Lucas v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., 257 F.3d 1249, 1256 (11th Cir.
2001).
The Plaintiff’s claims cannot be brought as long as his convictions are
outstanding. Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486–87, 114 S. Ct. 2364, 2372
(1994) (Section 1983 claims); Rowe v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 279 F.3d 1271,
1287 (11th Cir. 2002) (applying Florida law) (negligence claims); Liappas v.
Augoustis, 47 So. 2d 582, 582 (Fla. 1950) (a conspiracy claim cannot survive where
the underlying civil wrong fails). In other words, in order to bring these claims,
the Plaintiff must first have his sentence or conviction invalidated. We affirm the
dismissal on this basis. 1
We express no opinion on the district court’s reliance on the doctrine of
collateral estoppel.
AFFIRMED.
1
In light of our holding, the Defendants’ motion to strike is denied as moot.
3